REALITY TV

July 2000
		What's behind the increasing popularity of "reality TV"? Robert Thompson, head of the Center for the Study of Popular Television at Syracuse University and Frank Farley, past president of the American Psychological Association, who teaches now at Temple University, take your questions.

Forum introduction Are just we trying to learn more about people by watching reality TV? Is there an age bias in this type of programming? Why would people want to be exposed this way? Will cross-promotion of reality programming on news shows hurt the news? Does TV production take away from the "reality" of this kind of programming? Could this type of TV lead to other, less acceptable forms of voyeurism?     July 5, 2000: A discussion on the rise of reality TV. Browse the NewsHour's coverage of media issues.

Alfonso F. Ruiz of Los Angeles, California asks: We are living in a time when we feel everyone is getting their fifteen minutes of fame, and we're not. The appearance of seemingly everyday people on TV makes for vicarious viewing on our part, and may go a little way towards making us feel we are them, and they are us. Do these shows illustrate how far people are willing to go to cash in on their allotted fifteen minutes? Why would people want to be exposed in this way?   Frank Farley responds: I agree with the "…making us feel were are them, and they are us." Yes, I believe these shows test people's willingness to "cash in" and also to do extreme things for fame and fortune (eat rats, swallow bugs, etc.). People do it, I believe, for several reasons, but it is probably their only chance at the golden ring, i.e., millionaire, fame. This is a chance at the changing their lives, at shaking things up. They may not get the jackpot, but may get some level of fame which might lead somewhere (book contract, who knows what?). It's also a big THRILL for many of them compared to their normal lives, and will stand out in the scrapbook of their lives forever.   Bob Thompson responds: Probably the only lure in America more powerful than money is fame. Shows like "Survivor," "Big Brother," etc. offer the possibility of both. In a culture that showers so much attention and so many rewards on celebrities, I suppose this should come as no surprise. Until relatively recently, to become famous, you usually had to be good at something: acting, playing a sport, reporting the news, whatever. With the multiplication of media outlets that came with cable TV, however, it's now possible to get on network TV without being particularly talented. Shows like "Jerry Springer" offered a national forum to those who would pay the cover charge: the potential sacrifice of their privacy and their dignity. Craving the spotlight and the cameras is not for everyone, but there are thousands of exhibitionists out there who are anxious to be on these shows, and millions of voyeurs (including me, I'm afraid) who are willing to watch them.